The #loancharge was designed to be penal in order to force people into voluntary settlement. But HMRC got carried away with their settlement terms adding IHT & penal interest. They could only do so because the #loancharge was so penal. So challenge this “fair share” claim by HMRC
This was the purpose of the #loancharge. It was meant to make the option of ‘voluntary’ settlement seem so much more attractive in comparison. Nobody was actually meant to suffer the #loancharge. But then the IHT department of HMRC decided that they too wanted their bit of flesh.
The #loancharge was never meant to be “fair” & neither now are the settlement terms. The irony of asking for IHT is that it’s due precisely because HMRC argue that it’s a write-off of a legitimate loan to the trust. (The attached was written by HMRC)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@HilajoPaul That’s something of which @LordsEconCom could make great play. So this is a LOAN charge? It’s applied to LOANS? But you’re charging income tax? Is that normal? No? So you’re arguing it’s not really a loan? So explain the IHT charge to us then? So it’s because of a loan write-off?
@HilajoPaul@LordsEconCom Let’s start again so Rangers deems income tax is due & this is accepted in Hoey, but the tax isn’t collectible from the individuals you pursue? So you created a charge on the loans that you say aren’t really loans but Rangers is basis for that? You’re still pursuing those people?
@HilajoPaul@LordsEconCom Ah, you’re only pursuing the people who did fully declare their loans/non-loans to you throughout. But you previously assessed them on their loans & the Courts said NO. So you pursued the wrong people on the wrong basis? But you want them to pay anyway?